creepypastafandomcom-20200222-history
Creepypasta Wiki:Requests for Adminship/TenebrousTorrent
This is the same application I used in August 2015. All the information is from my old account: SoPretentious. I was an administrator for 6+ months except for one week and my last application had unanimous support. I'm here to apply for administrator's rights. I would like to remove spam/rude/pointless comments from stories, and clean up spam/shill blogs. Also, to help out with deletion appeal. And lastly, to help with keeping the site free of disruption and maintain quality standards. I would be particularly good at this. These Are All The Things I Did As An Administrator *Blank stories from user-pages and talk pages. *Edit stories for grammar, punctuation, and format. *Add to stories that need to be reviewed. *Add to stories that need to be deleted. *Categorize pages. *Rollback improper edits. *Help users with questions on the forum. *Move pages. With Administrator's Rights, I Could Do More For The Wiki *Use administrative templates on users' talk pages. *Help with deletion appeal, and outlining issues with users wondering why their story was deleted. *Uphold the Quality Standards, by editing good stories that need revision, and deleting unsalvageable stories, and protecting/unprotecting stories that need it. *Remove the Marked for Review from stories that have been revised/were unnecessarily marked for review. *Block users for: **Vandalizing the wiki (two weeks, then one month, then two months, then six months, then indefinite). **Creating an inappropriate username (indefinite). **Creating a spam page (three days, then one week, then two weeks). **Plagiarism (one month and alert staff). **Re-uploading deleted stories (warning, then one day). *Give warnings for minor issues like adding a nonexistent category (after a warning is one day, then doubling the expiry time for each infraction thereafter). **Discretion should always be used for blocks involving repeated offenses. Users who post Wikidrama/harassing behavior can be issued a two hour block or one day block if needed, then double the expiry time for each infraction thereafter. Accomplishments *Started the Vehicles category. *Created a grading rubric. *Created writing advice pages. *Helped clean up the videogames category. Requirements † denotes the requirement is fulfilled. :Must have been active on the wiki for six months.† ::June 9, 2014—This is the date of my first contribution to the wiki. I was active for almost four months, then had intermitted activity for a few months, Then I edited consistently from March 2015 to March 2016. ::My Contributions. :Must have at least 800 edits, 600 of which must be on articles.† ::Total Edits: 6,458 ::Article Edits: 2,881 ::Archived Edits: 1,322 ::Edit Count. :Must know how to move files and pages.† ::Click the arrow next to the "Edit" button. Click "Rename." For files, click the image, then click "More Info" then click the arrow next to the "edit" and click "delete." :Must know how to rollback bad edits.† ::Click the arrow next to the "Edit" button. Click "History." Then select the revision you wish to remove, and click "Compare Selected Revisions." From there, you can click "undo." This will effectively rollback bad edits. There is also the option of going to a user's contribution page, and clicking "rollback" in the event of multiple cases of vandalism. :Must know how to block users for an appropriate amount of time.† ::This is done by going to the user's contribution page, then clicking "block user." Then add a reason and expiry time. Expiry times are outlined above. :Must know how to delete pages.† ::Click the arrow next to the "Edit" button. Then click "Delete." Add the reason for deletion. Send a message to the user, recommending the writer's workshop and pointing out the Quality Standards. :Must know how to categorize pages.† ::Scroll to the bottom of the page and click next to "Categories." Type the name of the category, and hit "Enter." Click the "Edit" button, and then click the trash-can icon to remove categories. :Must be familiar with the wiki layout.† ::Yes. TL;DR—This wiki needs another administrator and I'd be great for the job. I have a great eye for quality, I can format pages well, I know grammar, and I can help the wiki run better. These are thankful messages I've received for making edits on stories, and one for cleaning up vandalism. Deadline: September 16th ---- This's gonna be a resounding no. You left without letting anyone know (or even responding to our numerous messages we left you and before that you randomly resigned) that you were stepping down. Earlier you stepped down because your 'reading retention' had declined and we re-instated you as admin after it seemed like you were willing to put in at least a week's worth of edits before requesting (this time, not so much). I see absolutely no reason why you should be promoted after your track record and the fact that you've put zero work into the site before asking to be promoted back up to admin. You have made absolutely no valuable edits since you vanished without saying anything back on June 4th 2016. I'm sorry, but given your flaky history, I really don't think you're cut out for being an admin without actually proving to the admins why promoting you wouldn't be a mistake. Final note: The 'things that you're doing currently' should actually contain things that you are currently doing on the site rather than stuff you used to do. EmpyrealInvective (talk) 16:17, September 9, 2016 (UTC) Gonna have to agree with Empy here. Since you've joined you've done nothing more than request admin rights. You have three other applications and in all three your inconsistent activity is noted as a major problem. That problem came to an inevitable climax when you left without warning while admin. I've never understood why you were in such a rush to become an admin in the first place, and I don't understand it now. I think it would be an obvious repetition of history for others to endorse your adminship. Inconsistent activity is hardly a mortal sin - but I simply don't understand why you couldn't let people know your status with either a blog post, or a talk message to one of the other admins. Further still you didn't even take the time to create a new '' application - you copy and pasted your last one. ChristianWallis (talk So this is from the perspective of someone who was made rollback a couple months ago. While I think it's clear you've done a deal of good work in the past on this wiki, I honestly can't quite understand why you would apply for adminship after three months of inactivity with absolutely no helpful contributions since your return (Also, your inactivity means that you do ''not meet the "Must have been active on the wiki for six months" requirement). Wouldn't working your way up (Perhaps to rollback?) make more sense and show your commitment to the wiki? Also, hearing about your history with leaving the site unannounced makes one feel wary about granting you the right again. If you are serious about this, then I think you should work your way up again and show everyone that granting you a right would not be a bad idea. And finally, I think creating a new, relevant application would have made more sense here, because as it sits you currently do nothing for the site. Dr. Frank N. Furter (talk) 17:08, September 9, 2016 (UTC) Honestly I wanted to vote neutral on this one and just voice my concerns without having a negative impact on your chances, but after reading some of the points made above, I had to shift to oppose. I'll tell you why. As a rollback you were astronomical, making dozens of mostly valuable edits around the clock. When I saw this, I knew you were a shoe-in to be a great admin. You made admin and didn't let me down. You were involved and ambitious, as I believe you'd be if rights were returned to this new screen name now. However, there are a few larger concerns that come before all the positive ends of it. You left twice, the first time seeming a bit odd. We all have off months or slow times on this site. We all realize that we have real lives that come first. Since taking my job at the USPS, my ability to active here has taken a hit. However, I never once considered tossing off my admin status. Instead, I communicated well to everyone that personal obligations would require me to step back a bit, and left the ball in their court. If the rest of the admin team felt that I was too uninvolved, we could have spoken further about it. You on the other hand dumped your admin rights due to troubles with "reading retention," yet you returned shortly later asking for the rights back. My biggest question on that was why did you need to dump your rights in the first place. You could have simply informed us over various media options that you were having some trouble dedicating yourself to the site at the moment, and we'd have all understood. You would have kept your rights and never had to reapply for them. Personally I was a bit on the fence about reinstating you the first time due to this. When you left the second time, it was understood that real life had probably kicked in and caused you distractions that kept you away from the site. No one would be mad at you for that. A simple message would have likely once more kept you with admin rights as we'd have understood you had something to take care of outside of the wiki. Like I said, we understand that this site isn't a full time job and that real life comes first. Now you return with a new user-name asking once more for admin rights. Here's the deal, no one is going to deny that you did some amazing things as both a rollback and an admin. You broke this wiki down to its coding and really put in real time effort. Your ambitions and qualities are not lost here. With that said though, it wouldn't be right to reinstate you right now. You've left twice without giving any real reason, and as far as I can tell, my original advice to you, which was to become less robotic and actually try and connect with the rest of the admin team never happened. With that said, here is some advice. Get back to what you do well, making quality edits. Build your name up here again the same way you did before. In a few months or so, maybe reapply for rollback and start there. But as of right now, I cannot support turning the admin station into a revolving door. You have all my respect, but I cannot support your application at this time. --K. Banning Kellum (talk) 13:31, September 11, 2016 (UTC) It's a solid no for me. After you vanished into thin air months back, I don't think showing up out of nowhere (making a sockpuppet in the process; not an issue in this case, but something definitely worth noting) and telling the admins to give the adminship you simply abandoned is a good idea. Your return and your creation of this application is so sudden and unprecedented it's almost inconsiderate and disrespectful... We absolutely have no reason to trust you after you neglected your adminship like that. You've ruined that trust. Now that it's gone, you need to start again, build that trust from scratch, and in the near future, maybe everything will be as it used to be when you were still an active admin. RuckusQuantum 14:32, September 11, 2016 (UTC)